MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101040750 · doi:10.1111/1467-9442.00214

Government Spending and Welfare with Returns to Specialization

2000· article· en· W2101040750 on OpenAlexaff
Michael B. Devereux, Allen Head, Beverly Lapham

Bibliographic record

VenueScandinavian Journal of Economics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonopolistic competitionEconomicsGovernment spendingConsumption (sociology)WelfareProductivityCompetition (biology)Government (linguistics)Consumer spendingTotal factor productivityProduction (economics)Monetary economicsPublic financeMicroeconomicsMacroeconomicsMarket economyRecessionMonopoly

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explore a novel channel through which government spending can stimulate consumption and welfare through its effects on aggregate productivity, without directly affecting either utility or production possibilities. In the presence of monopolistic competition and increasing returns to specialization, it is shown that government spending can partly alleviate the inefficiencies of monopolistic competition. This is because government spending generates an endogenous increase in total factor productivity by increasing the variety of intermediate goods. If the degree of increasing returns to variety is large enough, a rise in such wasteful government spending may increase consumption levels enough to increase welfare. JEL classification : E 60

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScandinavian Journal of EconomicsSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207